Posted
by
Zonkon Tuesday February 12, 2008 @01:03PM
from the say-goodbye-to-the-hardcore- dept.

Reservoir Hill writes "An article from last week runs down the new mass audience for gaming among families, women and older people. The importance of the mass audience in gaming's spectacular growth is seen most clearly in the success of Nintendo's Wii, which is far outselling its more technically advanced hardware competitors, the Xbox 360 from Microsoft and PlayStation 3 from Sony. Wii Play was the No. 2-selling game of last year even though it received an abysmal score of 58 out of 100 at Metacritic, which aggregates reviews. The Times says that as video games become more popular hard-core gamers are becoming an ever smaller part of the audience. 'Paradoxically, at a moment when technology allows designers to create ever more complex and realistic single-player fantasies, the growth in the now $18 billion gaming market is in simple, user-friendly experiences that families and friends can enjoy together.'"

None of the politicians will go after casual games. The same number will go after the hard core games until those games also receive mainstream status, which is going to be another decade or so at the current rate.

A friend of mine is studying to become a laparoscopic surgeon, and she tells me that she often catches herself humming the super mario brothers theme song as she controls the instruments...even switching to the world 1-2 theme if something goes wrong.

It is not the status in the public eye so much as it is the enormous amounts of money and investment that are now tied up in the electronic gaming industry. The total annual revenues of the electronic gaming industry or even just the computer and console gaming industries now collectively exceeds the total annual revenues of Hollywood and has for several years now so you can bet your bottom dollar that a portion of those profits will be spent on lobbyists to protect the interests of the gaming industry on c

The total annual revenues of the electronic gaming industry or even just the computer and console gaming industries now collectively exceeds the total annual revenues of Hollywood and has for several years now

Not quite. The game industry has exceeded the American box office for several years now. But there's quite a bit more to Hollywood. DVD is currently the biggest piece of the pie. There's also television and merchandising. Is the music industry considered Hollywood as well? Whether it is or not,

Explain to me how playing a game on a system where coordination is a big key, is fun wile you are drunk. Or playing any game while drunk. This is something I just never understood. What is it about being intoxicated that makes playing games more fun?

Explain to me how playing a game on a system where coordination is a big key, is fun wile you are drunk. Or playing any game while drunk. This is something I just never understood. What is it about being intoxicated that makes playing games more fun?

Depends on how alcohol affects you, but for a lot of people everything becomes more fun when drunk. A friend of mine has one drink and everything she hears comes across to her as completely hilarious. Similar to how I've heard everything comes across with a deep, almost spiritual experience when on LSD.

Do you know what "slapstick" style comedy is? Well, basically, drunk people playing Wii is practically slapstic and therefore amusing.

Plus, sometimes it takes the edge off and lets you cut loose a little... My friends and I, who are all in our mid 20's to early 30's, have Halo parties once every month or two. We get together, we drink, we order pizza, and we play Halo. There's a point where I get a nice buzz going that I really have a lot of fun. I'm not buzzed enough that it affects my playing abilit

God, you're so right about Halo. I love playing Halo with friends while buzzed, and my performance is rarely impacted by it. Unfortunately, as the night goes on, the buzz eventually turns into authentic drunkeness and that's when I start to suck.

You're forgetting the social aspect of the equation. Booze + friends = hilarity. One of the funniest moments that I can remember is playing Monopoly. 'Friend A' is completely ripped and realizes that 'Friend B' has been collecting money from 'Friend A' for at least an hour from a property that 'Friend A' owns. Never would have happened if we were sober.

My 3-year-old son actually had fun with the Rub-A-Dub Demo on the PS3 we downloaded off Sony Online. It uses the controllers tilt sensors to let you float a duck around the screen to collect little ducklings. You can also jump by flicking the controller up. He loves making the duck bounce around the screen.

Basically, I think it's as much about the controller as it is about the games. When you have that tactile feedback it's a lot easier to "get" the game quickly.

I race online (PC only tho) and a couple of us regulars have have created our own variation. Everyone has to stop the bus from finishing the race. Turns a 'violent' race game (flatout2) almost into a co-op mode. On the topic of the headline those guys are actually a few years older than i am at 58 and 49 i think:)

hurfy/royce/cycloneOnline gamer for over 25 years, since ASCII darts on a teletype;)

Sure, if you consider party games the epitome of gaming... I, and many others however don't. I know plenty of people who bought a Wii with all the hype, and months later they don't play anything. The games lineup it has going aside from a handful of games is utter disposable crap. Third party sales are for the most part garbage, and it doesn't help people buy the Wii for Wii sports and almost Wii sports alone.Nintendo got it right in terms of a successful product, but the jury is still out on its quality

'Paradoxically, at a moment when technology allows designers to create ever more complex and realistic single-player fantasies, the growth in the now $18 billion gaming market is in simple, user-friendly experiences that families and friends can enjoy together.'

So the NYT is just confirming what those of us who have played games from the '80 and early '90s have known for years.

So the NYT is just confirming what those of us who have played games from the '80 and early '90s have known for years.

Yep. Maybe with some luck, the lords of the game studios will read the article. As many have already noted, the folks at Nintendo figured this out a long time ago. But hard-core gamers are the folks making most of the games. It reminds me a bit of designers and websites. A few years ago many designers simply made sites for other designers. Now most of the designers have realized that the

"Yep. Maybe with some luck, the lords of the game studios will read the article. As many have already noted, the folks at Nintendo figured this out a long time ago."

My thoughts exactly. Don't get me wrong...I am VERY impressed with some of the graphics and sound that many modern games have...but, I think somewhere along the way, the "WOW" factor of graphics overrode everything else, and just simple fun game play took a backseat.

I mean, look back to the old arcade games, Robotron is still one of the most

PC gaming basically ruined games for over a decade. The lack of a simple and intuitive controller, or usability in general, shifted the focus towards needlessly complex games, leaving us with a stagnated market of FPSes, RTSes and micromanagement galore.

And boy am I ever glad to see it all finally come crashing down in favour of making games fun again. Good riddance to "hardcore gaming".

Exactly, rate Wii Play on the same standards Mario Galaxy and it doesn't stand up too well.
Rate it as a nice low price bonus added to a Wiimote purchase and it's excellent value. Reviewers of the game seemeed to miss its point and failed to score it for what it was. But then reviewers tend to look down on anything outside of their definition of gaming. Which is probably why I've never seen a gaming mag review Bejeweled even though I bet it's one of the most played games in the world today.
In terms of pric

Wii Play sold so well because it costs about the same as a Wii Remote and it comes with a Wii Remote, so you basically got the game for free. Many people bought Wii Play the same day they bought their Wii console.

Exactly. Wii motes were impossible to come by and the only way you could get one is if you bought Wii Play. I opened up Wii play, put it in the Wii, and played it for maybe 30 minutes before returning it to it's case and never reopening it again. The game was boring. I bet Nintendo knows which games is the most popular, they do statistic gathering on the Wii.

I don't disagree with the general premise of the article, but using Play as a data point is pretty weak. The game itself is only $10, since its bundled with a $40 controller that is required for almost all games. As a bargain game, I don't think it competes at the same level as say Bioshock or Metroid.

Wii Play was "best-selling" because it included a controller. Given the choice between buying a controller or buying Wii Play for nearly the same price, Wii Play was a brain-dead choice. That doesn't mean that old people are dominating gaming. I'd be much more interested to see how other Wii games stacked up.

Um no, thats nothing new. Games have been social for quite some time, ever since goldeneye. Wii games often lack a learning curve, true, but they also tend to lack gameplay, depth, replayability, polish, and other aspects. It's a console about image and hype, and not actualy about quality gaming.

shows this new demographics buys games, we can talk about a shift in the industry. Until then, it's just a reporter trying to predict an industry shift that shows no signs of actually happening yet. Say what you will, they might be massively more expensive to product, but hardcore gamers actually BUY hardcore games. I'm 40 and I have spent every free minute since last August trying to keep up with the great load of games for the 360 and PS3 and am currently splitting my time between multiplayer COD4 and Ratchet & Clank Future.

There's probably a pending market correction on hardcore games. Graphics are hitting diminishing returns (double the processing power only gets you a marginally better image), and people who are good producing those graphics demand a high salary. The hardcore development houses are inevitably going to scale back when they realize that small puzzle games that are hacked up in a month by one guy are turning the same profit as their hundred-larg

That's rediculous. By that logic, Mercedes should stop selling luxury cars and get into the same market as Kia because, hey, the Kia is produced cheaply and sells at a higher profit margin (no idea if that's true, just making an analogy). The point is if there's a market for "hardcore" (is Mario Galaxy hardcore? Because I bet it wasn't cheap to produce!) games and you can make a profit at it you bet your ass no one is leaving money on the table. That just doesn't make any sense.

I love the Wii, but you can't use Wii Play as any kind of reliable metric for the popularity of that kind of game. It's essentially a $10 game bundled with a $40 remote that most console owners were intending to buy anyway.

Like any genre, the Minigame phenomenon is only as strong as the title itself. Raving Rabbids was actually pretty solid; Carnival Games is utter garbage. Unfortunately, publishers see the unintentional success of games like Wii Play and assume that's what people want.

Mario Party is a classic, so that's going to be popular. Raving Rabbids is a solid enough game that makes good use of the controller. Wario Ware is goofy and fun, but is becoming tired and cliche.

Frankly, the less party games we see, the better off the few that remain will be. Otherwise it all becomes shovelware at some point.

Frankly, the less party games we see, the better off the few that remain will be. Otherwise it all becomes shovelware at some point.

At this point, I would say it really doesn't matter and we'll get good games anyway. According to vgchartz it's at 21mio sold with 44% market share and currently selling more than the PS3 and Xbox360 combined, which means it'll be creeping towards 50%. Yeah, I've heard Wii buyers buy less games than the others but I doubt the difference is that large, senior citizens may not be the big buyers around my friends I think you'll find just as many Wii games as with other consoles...

Indeed. The 'article' author is a troll or a cretin. The sales figure for Wii Play are no more indicative of choice than those of Windows Vista. For the majority of purchasers, they're 'freebies' with the hardware.

love the Wii, but you can't use Wii Play as any kind of reliable metric for the popularity of that kind of game. It's essentially a $10 game bundled with a $40 remote that most console owners were intending to buy anyway.

Agreed. A better example of a popular Wii game with excellent gameplay but graphics that wouldn't challenge a SNES is Geometry Wars (yes, I know it's also available on XBOX360 and PC, but it really shines on the Wii). It also scores a respectable 80 on Metacritic [metacritic.com].

When you look at board games which do you think do better, the really complex Avalon Hill games that target a very select audience or Candy Land and Life?As much as I live Settlers of Cattan and Axis and Allies, I see Monopoly on more shelves at homes than of the previous.

When you make something easier to understand, you're going to get more market share: lowest common denominator, right?

That company must have gone ages ago, after all, you say there is not enough of a market compared to simpler games, so since they were founded in 1958, by now they should have gone belly up.

Ah but no, Avalon Hill has spend decades succesfully making a profit selling extremely complex games. Way more complex then Monopoly, and still somehow making a profit, enough to satisfy the parent company Hasbro. Mmm, were have I heard that name before. Hasbro, don't they also own Parker Brothers, the publishers of Mon

Nintendo actually has done something really bright in this, I don't want to compare them to Hasbro but, We're seeing a lot more "serious" games like CoD coming to the Wii. They've learned to diversify, but, also by creating these simple "candy land-esq" games they're reaching a broader market.There is always a market for Avalon Hill, but the broader base is your Candy Lands.

Settlers always makes me think of M.U.L.E [wikipedia.org] which while an awesome game, I can't think of many people who played it. Maybe the idea of settling a colony planet didn't appeal to them like fighting turtles...

When you look at board games which do you think do better, the really complex Avalon Hill games that target a very select audience or Candy Land and Life?As much as I live Settlers of Cattan and Axis and Allies, I see Monopoly on more shelves at homes than of the previous.When you make something easier to understand, you're going to get more market share: lowest common denominator, right?

We've got Monopoly, Life, some Monopoly JR game, and a couple of those Candy Land type of games. You know the best game s

Of course this might have to do with Monopoly being created and sold about a million years before (1935 vs 1995, 60 years head start?) either of those two other games were released. It could also be due to the marketing done for Monopoly, or the fact that Monopoly is sold everywhere, and the other two in niche stores and markets. Only now is Catan and Axis and Allies starting to become somewhat mainstream, but they still have a ways to go. I know I would never play Monopoly now, nor would I buy a copy. If I

As much as I live Settlers of Cattan [sic] and Axis and Allies, I see Monopoly on more shelves at homes than of the previous.

Monopoly is more complex than Settlers of Catan -- the rules are longer, there's more pieces (bills are pieces too!), and there's math requiring percentages for (un)mortgaging. Monopoly has been around since '35 while Settlers has been around since '95. In my current gen of friends, Settlers is actually more popular even among non-gamers (except for collections of "branded" Monopoly

no one is playing monopoly or life because they think those are the greatest games in the world.

No, they're playing Monopoly because it's sufficiently fun, 1 to >8 can play, most people already have it, and most people already know how to play it. Starting is simply a matter of "anyone up for Monopoly?", dump the contents on the table, and look up the starting $$$ distribution. The goal is FUN, NOW.

That in contrast with "the greatest game in the world", which probably requires conneseurship to appreciate

That in contrast with "the greatest game in the world", which probably requires conneseurship to appreciate, has player restrictions, few have it (from both cost & awareness), and takes 30 minutes just trying to read & explain the rules.

What? You mean like Baccarat [wikipedia.org]? Granted, it's still a card game so set up SHOULD be easy, but I don't know anyone who can play it... and absolutely no one who can play it well...

Paradoxically, at a moment when technology allows designers to create ever more complex and realistic single-player fantasies, the growth in the now $18 billion gaming market is in simple, user-friendly experiences that families and friends can enjoy together.'

Finally maybe the games industry will realise that great graphis does not equal a great game. It's always been about the gameplay. It's that certain something something that means you can pick it up and get hooked and just keep on playing.

Where are the great graphics in Tetris, in Pac Man, and others. Games that are constantly played all over the world all the time. They're simple, easy to play, hard to master fun games.

Indeed. One of the games I played the most on my Wii is Geometry Wars: Galaxies. It has "worse" graphics than virtually anything that has been done since the SNES era (well, thats debatable I guess...i think the special effects look cool as hell), but man its fun.

Take a look at many of the "classic" toys made from wood, rope and metal chains. They're all deceptively simple-looking things, until you pick them up and start playing around with them. Then you realize the hidden challenge to them. Cracker Barrel restaurants sell modern "replicas" of many of these puzzle games... things where you have to remove a pole from a knot of rope, for example - or twist things around to unlink a chain. Many of the classic Asian toys were like this too. Simple but ingeniously

The only problem with bringing up such outstanding classics as Tetris, Pac Man, etc. is how much time can you really spend playing each of those games? I'm not just talking about one single sitting, but multiple sittings over the course of a week or a month. The point is that those are good pick up and leave games when you're bored once in a while, but then you tend to not play them for a longer period of time while finding something else to do. Granted for people who only play games a few times a month,

Which version of PacMan do you prefer, the arcade one or the Atari2600 port? Graphics do make better games. Graphics alone however are not enough to carry a game alone, but they do improve games, sometimes a lot. When you look back at the great games of the past you will quickly realize that almost all of them had great graphics for their time. And even Tetris can be improved with better graphics, a simple look at more modern versions like the DS one or TGM should quickly show that or if that isn't enough

My kids can play the Wii, my mother in law can play the Wii, I can play.. guess what is the most played console in the house? Oh, and we can all play and interact together.
Not all people who want to play video games live in their mother's basements. Games manufacturers are finally realizing this. Enough ultra-graphic-environment-Doom-clones, lets do something different - like actually interact with each other.
Just think of "group-play" as a feature that they are working on... like graphics. So the W

Constantly I see games that are visually appealing receiving glowing reviews, but if you want to know what the best game in the history of console gaming is, odds are its on NES. My guess would be Mario. Horrible graphics, bad storyline, greatest game ever. Even today, I can still sit there and play these games and find them very entertaining. Sometimes simplicity isn't such a bad thing.

For many people "Playing a Game" is a means of relaxation. They don't want to think or do puzzles or remember WHY they're shooting hundreds of zombies. They just want something they can pick up and play and be good at and feel good about themselves. If it's too hard either complex movements or thoughts they won't get that rush that they get from playing.

Conversely, there are those of us here that WANT more of a challenge from our games. A good game will be able t

Few games had great story lines in the timeframe you're talking about tho. Once you get a gamers interest you can afford to put out a couple of mediocre games and still keep their interest. Take Elite for example... A great first game (also with bad graphics even in it's day) and people kept buying the pathetic sequels hoping for another giant like the first game. I think even if a new Elite came out today you'd have strong sale

but if you want to know what the best game in the history of console gaming is, odds are its on NES.

Actually I would very much doubt that. Other then MarioBros3 there really isn't much on the NES that can compete with later games on the SNES. A Zelda3 beats a Zelda1 in almost every aspect, FF3/6 beats FF1 and its the same with most other games. The only reason why MarioBros3 can hold up is because it was a very late game on the NES and could thus make the most of the available hardware and is aside from lack of more colorful sprites is mostly equivalent to SNES games (multi-dimensional scrolling, worldma

The wii vs. ps3 and xbox 360 remind me of D&D vs. aD&D. D&D is way more accessible than the sometimes cumbersome rules and other overhead of AD&D. The wii is similarly accessible to a much larger audience, and once the hardcore gamers have bought their one 'must have' ps3 game, their purchases are done, whereas a family system can fuel years of continuous purchasing.

How about the fans of game journalism join together in silence for all the old magazines that once engaged in erudite criticism. "Computer Gaming World" under founder Russell Sipe and successor Johnny Wilson was another. G

I think that there has been a mass market for games all along, except that the gaming media refused to believe that the market exist. The gaming media writes for a very select audience - the demographic that spends money to get the best gaming hardware, wants games that last longer than 10 hours of total gaming or more than 15 minutes/session. This is the same gaming media that says that it's not about graphics, it's about gameplay, yet will give mediocore scores to anything that doesn't have the most adv

I don't know about that. The Stardock [metacritic.com] games always get pretty good reviews, and they certainly don't have the most up-to-date graphics. It probably depends a lot on the genre and the platform. It certainly is true, however, that you won't find games from a company like Stardock unless you're going out of your way to look for them because they aren't very heavily marketed.

Gamers have always come in different races and ages and income brackets.

Someone who plays Tetris for an hour at a time three times a week is a video game consumer, just as someone who raids in WoW for five hours a night is.

Nintendo hasn't so much blown open the demographics -- though they have -- as they've blown open the debate and the recognition.

No-one has said, in eighty years, "all watchers of movies fit the same demographic." Television has ten networks PER demographic. So why this overwrought, antiquated insistence that All Gamers Are Of The Same Ilk?

I worked for Gamestop for a year, in 2005, and I developed my own admittedly anti-PC gamer categories. One of the MANY demographcis I saw represented was the fratboy/thug gamer: the white or hispanic males between ages 18 and 24, who were buying every sex and violence 360 title they could snap up. To so much of the world, they are the only gamers. To us, they were about 20% of our patrons.

If the rest of the world is finally, FINALLY starting to recognize that "gamer" means a lot, LOT more than just the fratboy/thug or the EQ addict in mom's basement, then so much the better.

"...the growth in the now $18 billion gaming market is in simple, user-friendly experiences that families and friends can enjoy together.'"I continually look for games that my 11-year old son and my wife and I can all play together and those are rather hard to find. I would rather the entire family play together on the 360 instead of my son playing on his XBox in his room, my wife watching TV in the living room and with myself playing GOW in the basement.

So get a Wii. Seriously... there are a ton of games that are available for it, and it takes more than just mashing buttons. It's what finally got my fiancee into actually wanting to play games. The XBox is a frat-boy toy. It's not made for families or groups of people.

The Times says that as video games become more popular hard-core gamers are becoming an ever smaller part of the audience.

No; adolescent males are becoming an ever-smaller part of the audience. More mature gamers, both older and younger, both hardcore and casual, want something very different from the testosterone-soaked boom-fest FPS of the month.

I wrote about a similar demographic shift [beryllium.ca] a few months ago, with regard to parents becoming more involved in video gaming with their children (and how the Wii and games like Guitar Hero help that process immensely).

So I guess that the new demographic Nintendo is going for are the wiitirees? Mario Shuffleboard? Early Bird Revolution? Mario Kart will include an Oldsmobile with the left blinker left on? Wii Sports includes "Getting the kids off the lawn" and Bingo?

You laugh now, but I hear "Zelda: The Legend of Social Security" is going to ROCK!

The preview I read mentioned some of the new and innovative ways Nintendo is using the Wiimote/Nunchuck to simulate rolling a wheelchair, balancing a checkbook, ordering new dentures, catching sounds for a hearing aid (unique new mini-game!), and moving in a queue.

I can't wait!

I also hear Nintendo is including a new "PillTime" Channel to remind those frequent players when its time for their meds.

Apparently I am "hardcore". I mean, I play Sam and Max and Puzzle Quest, but I also enjoy Mass Effect and Half Life 2 (single player). I can't pull off a headshot to save my life, but still, since I don't particularly enjoy a certain vendor's hardware or games, I'm some sort of "hardcore" type, an irrelevant dinosaur, a dying breed.So great, fine, I really just don't care any more. If the market segments significantly along these lines, maybe it'll segment more ways and we'll stop lumping in all people w

Um depending on what you classify as "Older", I believe that intersection has passed sometime ago.I am 30 years old, and still play video games. So do most people I know. I grew up in the Nintendo generation, (really all console and computer gaming really from C-64 to present. Thats Celceo vision, Atari, Nintendo, 64, Cube, Wii, Neo-Geo, Turbo Grafix 16, Sega Gennsis, Saturn, Dreamcast, X-box, x-box360, TRS-80, 086, 286, 486, Pentium, 1,2,3,4, AMD equivalents, 64bit, Dual Core). If I actually tried to list

There's been a lot of ink on Wii Play and the innovative controller. But it bears repeating. It's not just that the Wii is family friendly and attracts a lot of non-traditional gamers, it's that the controller lets you interact with the game on a whole new level.When you have to swing your arms to swing a sword or tennis racket, you're engaging whole other parts of your brain that bring you into the experience. Working up a sweat playing tennis against my wife is something that's never happened to me before